Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Showing 41–60 of 98 results

Haddad v. Francis, 537 A.2d 174 (1986)

Haddad v. Francis, 537 A.2d 174 (1986) Connecticut state

...make any payment of said increase in said taxes as aforesaid, Landlord shall be entitled with respect thereto, to any and all remedies to which Landlord may be entitled for default in payment of rent. Tenant shall also be responsible...

Danpar Associates v. Falkha, 438 A.2d 1209 (1981)

Danpar Associates v. Falkha, 438 A.2d 1209 (1981) Connecticut state

...The letter closed, however, as follows: “My client had no objection to re-writing the lease with the increased rent, but at this point the only thing that stands in the way is money. Please take this up with your...

Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)

Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998) Connecticut state

...Monies attempted to increase the rent and to require a security deposit, neither of which was provided for in the lease or agreed to by the defendants.

Haddad v. Francis, 537 A.2d 174 (1986)

Haddad v. Francis, 537 A.2d 174 (1986) Connecticut state

...the base rent of $550. Although there was no testimony that the overages were for taxes, the court is asked to infer this fact upon the defendant’s contention that there was no evidence that the increased payments were for...

Brook Run Development Corp. v. Noon, 230 Conn. App. 424 (2025)

Brook Run Development Corp. v. Noon, 230 Conn. App. 424 (2025) Connecticut state

...In its summary process complaint, the plaintiff alleged five counts: (1) nonpayment of rent; (2) refusal to agree to a fair and equitable rent increase; (3) nuisance; (4) violation of the terms of the lease; and (5) right or privilege...

Danpar Associates v. Falkha, 438 A.2d 1209 (1981)

Danpar Associates v. Falkha, 438 A.2d 1209 (1981) Connecticut state

On September 19, the defendants sent a check to the plaintiff in payment of the full amount of rent due for June, July, August and September at the increased rate. On September 20, the plaintiff's attorney, in another letter...

Danpar Associates v. Falkha, 438 A.2d 1209 (1981)

Danpar Associates v. Falkha, 438 A.2d 1209 (1981) Connecticut state

On September 19, the defendants sent a check to the plaintiff in payment of the full amount of rent due for June, July, August and September at the increased rate. On September 20, the plaintiff’s attorney, in another letter...

Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998)

Warner Associates v. Logan, 50 Conn. App. 90 (1998) Connecticut state

...The defendants voluntarily paid the increased rent as provided in paragraph twenty-nine of the lease. On March 26,1993, the plaintiff insisted on the security deposit, refused to accept the extension and forwarded to the defendants a proposed five...

Danpar Associates v. Falkha, 438 A.2d 1209 (1981)

Danpar Associates v. Falkha, 438 A.2d 1209 (1981) Connecticut state

...a lower rent. The first letter from the plaintiff's attorney indicated that further negotiations might take place. Payment was made as soon as the tenants realized that the landlord insisted upon the full amount of the increase, the day...

Danpar Associates v. Falkha, 438 A.2d 1209 (1981)

Danpar Associates v. Falkha, 438 A.2d 1209 (1981) Connecticut state

...a lower rent. The first letter from the plaintiff’s attorney indicated that further negotiations might take place. Payment was made as soon as the tenants realized that the landlord insisted upon the full amount of the increase, the day...

Tuttle v. Martin, 352 A.2d 321 (1975)

Tuttle v. Martin, 352 A.2d 321 (1975) Connecticut state

...accept the increase and offered checks, in the amount of $80 each, to the plaintiff on the first days of August, September, and October. Each check bears the defendant's notation on its face that it is rent for the...

Haddad v. Francis, 537 A.2d 174 (1986)

Haddad v. Francis, 537 A.2d 174 (1986) Connecticut state

...Thereafter, from July, 1978, through October, 1982, the defendant increased his monthly payments in varying amounts of $580, $595, $610, $620 and $640. Starting with November, 1982, the monthly payments returned to the base rent of $550. In the plaintiff...

Section 46a-64c

Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Sullivan Associates, 250 Conn. 763 (1999) Connecticut state

...Had the defendant accepted Roper as a tenant, her monthly section 8 rental assistance subsidy would have been increased to $686. Under the section 8 program, Roper would have been responsible each month for paying $64 of the rent to...

Section 46a-64c

Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Sullivan Associates, 250 Conn. 763 (1999) Connecticut state

...her monthly section 8 rental assistance would have been increased to $739. Under the section 8 program, Hanson would have been responsible for paying the defendant $11 of the $750 rent each month. The remaining $739 would have been paid...

Haddad v. Francis, 537 A.2d 174 (1986)

Haddad v. Francis, 537 A.2d 174 (1986) Connecticut state

...The defendant concedes that if all of the increases in taxes were not paid by him, his total liability for “unpaid rent” is $1500.54. The court has reached the slightly higher figure of $1724.14.

Brook Run Development Corp. v. Noon, 230 Conn. App. 424 (2025)

Brook Run Development Corp. v. Noon, 230 Conn. App. 424 (2025) Connecticut state

...The defendant does not challenge the court’s determination that, as a tenant at sufferance, her refusal to pay a fair and equitable rent increase constitutes good cause for eviction under §47a-23c. Instead, she simply relies on her primary...

Danpar Associates v. Falkha, 438 A.2d 1209 (1981)

Danpar Associates v. Falkha, 438 A.2d 1209 (1981) Connecticut state

...The letter closed, however, as follows: "My client had no objection to rewriting the lease with the increased rent, but at this point the only thing that stands in the way is money. Please take this up with your client...

O'Brien Properties, Inc. v. Rodriguez, 215 Conn. 367 (1990)

O'Brien Properties, Inc. v. Rodriguez, 215 Conn. 367 (1990) Connecticut state

...if the tenant refuses to agree to “a fair and equitable rent increase.” The trial court reasoned that since “a tenant at sufferance is not obligated to pay rent but only the reasonable rental value of the premises as use...

Haddad v. Francis, 537 A.2d 174 (1986)

Haddad v. Francis, 537 A.2d 174 (1986) Connecticut state

In part II of this memorandum, the conclusion was reached that the obligation of the tenant to reimburse the landlord for increases in insurance premiums was not, under the terms of the lease, the equivalent of a default in rent...